text:
The German Unix User Group
The German Unix User Group, founded in 1984, is a non-profit organization for professional system and network administrators, security experts and system programmers which prefer to use a Unix operating system.
Unix, in our understanding, includes free systems like Linux, BSD and OpenSolaris variants as well as commercial Unix systems. Important to us are open and well defined interfaces and APIs, the compliance with internet and other open standards and last but not least: the chance to have a look deep into the system.
Since more than 20 years GUUG organizes national and international conferences, where core developers and other well known experts present cutting edge topics, attendees can get professional training in tutorials or exchange experiences and ideas with peers. We also have a member magazine (called UpTimes). In a couple of metropolitan areas there are local events (for free) with talks/presentations which is a good local opportunity to listen to new topics and talk to your peers.
Like in other countries around the globe there is a SAGE group (SAGE stands for System Administrators Guild) also in Germany which is a forum for the system administration community.


text:
Here's the latest article from the Thyroid Health site at BellaOnline.com.
Graves Disease
Let's take a look into Graves Disease. What are the symptoms? What are the treatments?
Please visit thyroidhealth.bellaonline.com for even more great content about Thyroid Health.
To participate in free, fun online discussions, this site has a community forum all about Thyroid Health located here -
I hope to hear from you sometime soon, either in the forum or in response to this email message. I thrive on your feedback!
Have fun passing this message along to family and friends, because we all love free knowledge!
Tracy Green, Thyroid Health Editor
One of hundreds of sites at BellaOnline.com

subset: commoncrawl


text: Stockpots are the ideal vessel for cooking broths, stews and soups, and our range of stockpots at Circulon offers fantastic versatility and quality, whatever you're cooking. Perfect for batch-cooking or feeding a hungry crowd, the high sides and various dimensions of our stockpots mean there's plenty of room to experiment with recipes. All of our non-stick stockpots include our fantastic Total® Non-Stick technology, so you don't need to worry about your foodie creations sticking to your cookware.


text:
Its always fucking pleasant to watch real incest porn featuring brothers and sisters make it with each other. And I know for real that youll like the idea of taking a glance at passionate brother so that to see the way he seduces and fucks his beautiful sister in fit of unbound passion. Hellish horny tempter starts with putting the feelers on stunning girls body, before filling her wet mouth with juicy cock.
Moreover, right on real incest sex cute sister gets vagina fucked by passionate brother.
Find your sis sexy? We know how it feels, and this is why we launched this site, a collection of proven tips helping you to seduce and succeed!
Overwhelmingly seductive exclusive scenes of first-time incest sex between fathers and their teen pumpkins await you at FSWDaughter!
Breathtaking hardcore sex videos featuring fabulously beautiful teenage starlets and their own older brothers - only at First Sex With Sister!
A good girl often gets surprises from her daddy. But a bad girl also gets some! See young chicks making their fathers so horny all the taboos are broken!
Young boys and girls unleashing their sexuality under strict supervision of their parents - now on exclusive homemade pics and video!
Looking for the nastiest incest scenes performed by perverted cock-hungry babes and their innocent teenage brothers? Weve got them here!
What can be more pleasant than taking part in exciting family orgies with moms, dads, bothers, sisters, sons and etc? Check it out on BigIncestFamily.com
Crazy documentaries of family relationships, 3D images and illustrated comics! You simply have never seen anything comparable!
Incest 3D
Incest Sites
Incest Porn
Incest Membersites Previews
Incest Sex
All persons depicted here in were at least 18 years of age:
18 USC 2257 Record-Keeping Requirements Compliance Statements


text:
Rumsfeld to Be Held Accountable for Torture?
There is continuing interest here and abroad in the first ruling by a federal appellate court to permit the continuance of a case charging a high‐level Bush administration official — then‐Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld — with being personally responsible for the torture of two American citizens in Iraq by American forces.
In an Aug. 13 editorial, "Holding Rumsfeld Accountable," the New York Times was excited because if Rumsfeld is convicted, "it makes clear — for the first time — that government officials can be held accountable for the intentional mistreatment of American citizens, even if that conduct happens in a war zone." Officials high up in Washington!
However, the editorial goes on to lament that there still is "no accountability for the abuse, and torture, of foreigners by American jailers and interrogators, which Mr. Rumsfeld and President George W. Bush personally sanctioned."
The New York Times is dead wrong. As I have often demonstrated here, under our U.S. War Crimes Act of 1996 and treaties we have signed, the U.N. Convention Against Torture and the Geneva Conventions — our interrogators and the highest U.S. officials can be held responsible for torture of non‐Americans, including suspected terrorists in our custody.
That's why it's valuable to know, as this case, Donald Vance and Nathan Ertel v. Donald Rumsfeld, moves deeper and higher through our justice system, what actually was done to these Americans and how the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals specifically documents how Rumsfeld was indeed personally responsible.
Can George W. Bush be next? And if the war crime of torture is eventually proved against the Obama administration, what about the role of President Obama? And what about this lesson for future administrations?
Working in Baghdad for a privately owned Iraqi security service, Vance and Ertel came upon shadowy dealings by their employer and reported their suspicions to the FBI. As the ever‐vigilant researcher and reporter Robyn Blumner of the St. Petersburg Times discovered ("Rumsfeld and the rule of law," Aug. 11), these whistleblowers were rewarded for their astuteness by being "taken in shackles to a U.S. military facility near Baghdad airport known as Camp Cropper where they were subjected to a range of abuses.
"Held incommunicado and in solitary confinement, their small, feces‐smeared cells were kept intolerably cold. The men claim the lights were on at all times, loud music was piped in and guards would wake them if they fell asleep. They were often deprived of food and water, physically threatened and abused by being slammed into walls while blindfolded."
As has often happened to suspected terrorists "detained" by us, there were no charges brought against Vance and Ertel. Apparently there wasn't even any way to fabricate charges, and they soon were released.
But these two plucky Americans, aware of Rumsfeld's hands‐on role in authorizing and implementing intensely "coercive interrogations" of prisoners held by our forces, decided not to let him get away with what happened to them under his watch. As independent American citizens, they took him, august though he was, to court.
In a justly ironic aside, Blumner notes that this year, Rumsfeld received the "Defender of the Constitution" Award from the American Conservative Union. Guess who presented this honor to him? The primary architect of "the dark side," Dick Cheney.
Jane Mayer, in her book The Dark Side, reported that when Rumsfeld took over as secretary of defense, he said to President Bush: "I need responsibility to prosecute the war, and the president said, 'You got it.' " In an equally revealing book, Torture Team: Rumsfeld's Memo and the Betrayal of American Values, Philippe Sands reports: "On December 3, 2002, Rumsfeld signed an 'Action Memo,' with the head: 'Counter‐resistance Techniques.' Among them: 'stress positions,' 'exploitation of phobias,' 'deprivation of lights and auditory stimuli' and other acutely coercive interrogations forbidden at the time in the Army Field Manual."
Now we come to the decision to continue the Vance and Ertel case against Rumsfeld by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge David Hamilton decides:
"We see no deficiency in the Complaint that would warrant dismissal on the issue of personal responsibility. Taking the factual allegations in the complaint as true, as we must, the plaintiffs have pled facts showing that it is plausible, and not merely speculative, that Secretary Rumsfeld was personally responsible for creating the policies that caused the alleged unconstitutional torture.
"The plaintiffs (also) have adequately alleged that Secretary Rumsfeld acted with deliberate indifference by not ensuring that the detainees were treated in a humane manner despite his knowledge of widespread detainees mistreatment."
This knowledge was based on Rumsfeld himself having ordered such inhumane treatment. But Rumsfeld claims that not having been there during the infliction of this treatment, he must be immune from personal responsibility from his high perch in Washington. And, of course, "state secrets" are involved.
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals does not agree. President Obama eschews any attention to such past issues. But what about the Republican candidates for the presidency? Do they have anything to say? I am particularly eager, Gov. Rick Perry, to hear from you on the Bush‐Cheney‐Obama accountability for war crimes on torture. You certainly do not refuse to look backward while also forging strongly ahead.


text:
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Nadal Cruises Through U.S. Open to Complete Career Grand Slam
Tennis has changed so much over the years that it is very difficult to fairly compare players from different eras; "Greatest Tennis Player of All-Time" is a mythical title but even if we confine the discussion to the Open Era it is not easy to choose from among Bjorn Borg, Pete Sampras, Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal.
Borg is the prodigy, setting numerous records (some of which have been broken but many of which still stand) for being the youngest player to accomplish various impressive feats, and he established an incredible simultaneous dominance at the French Open and Wimbledon: Borg won a record six French Open titles plus five straight Wimbledon titles and for an unprecedented three straight years (1978-80) he conquered both events. When he retired he held the modern record for titles won at both events; Federer and Sampras subsequently surpasssed Borg's Wimbledon mark but Sampras never even reached the French Open Final while Federer has managed to win that event just once (and only by avoiding a showdown with Nadal, who has bested Federer in three French Open Finals). Even after Nadal's most recent triumph, Borg is still the youngest player to win nine Grand Slam singles titles and he also did so in the fewest number of events (22). Borg won at least one Grand Slam for a record eight straight years (1974-81), a mark later tied by Sampras. He retired at just 25 years of age, after a year in which he won the French Open and made it to the Finals at both Wimbledon and the U.S. Open. Borg finished with 11 Grand Slam singles titles but he played in an era when the Australian Open was hardly treated like a major by most of the top non-Australian players: Borg competed in that event just once. If Borg had played more frequently in the Australian Open and/or not retired in his prime he likely would have added several Grand Slam titles to his resume. The only significant accomplishment that he failed to attain is winning the U.S. Open crown; he reached the Finals there four times without success. Borg won 11 of the 27 Grand Slams that he entered (41%) and he won 141 of his 157 Grand Slam singles matches (89.8%); both of those percentages are all-time records. Borg made the Finals 16 times in those 27 Grand Slams, he never lost in the first round of a Grand Slam and he only lost in the second round once. Borg was renowned for his phenomenal conditioning and his emotional steadiness; he did not get rattled if his opponent hit a great shot because he figured that his opponent would have to hit many such shots to beat him, a task that most players were not mentally and/or physically equipped to do.
Sampras broke Borg's Wimbledon record by capturing seven titles there and he set records for most weeks holding the number one ranking (286) and most years finishing as the number one ranked player (six, 1993-98). Sampras broke Roy Emerson's career record by winning 14 Grand Slam singles titles but he played in 51 Grand Slam events so he was much less dominant than Borg; comparing Sampras' Grand Slam career to Borg's is like comparing Emmitt Smith's rushing statistics with Jim Brown's: Smith set the all-time NFL career rushing record but he played for many more seasons and had many more rushing attempts than Brown, so few if any football experts consider Smith to be the greatest running back of all-time. Also, while Sampras' powerful serve proved to be very effective at Wimbledon and the U.S. Open the slow clay at Roland Garros made Sampras look very ordinary: in 13 French Open appearances Sampras made it to the semifinals just once while suffering three first round losses and five second round defeats.
Federer is the artist; even casual fans marvel at the way that he seems to effortlessly glide around the court. He started out his Grand Slam career slowly--amassing six first round losses before winning his first title (2003 Wimbledon)--but he made up for lost time by reaching the semifinals in a record 23 straight Grand Slam events and tallying a record 16 Grand Slam wins, including the career Grand Slam that eluded both Borg and Sampras. Federer dominated Wimbledon and the U.S. Open while padding his Grand Slam totals with four Australian Open titles in 11 tries; Federer has played in the Australian Open each year of his career but, as noted above, Borg--like most of the best players in his era--generally bypassed this tournament, while Sampras won there twice in 11 attempts but also skipped the event three times. Federer won each of the other Grand Slams at least once before he even reached the French Open Finals--and then he lost three straight times to Nadal in those Finals before winning there in 2009 after an injury-plagued Nadal lost in the fourth round. Federer's Grand Slam percentages are 16 titles in 46 appearances (34.8%) and a 208-30 match record (87.4%). Federer held the number one ranking for a record 237 straight weeks and he has been number one for a total of 285 weeks, just one week short of Sampras' record.
Nadal is the grinder; his physical conditioning and mental toughness are very reminiscent of Borg. Like Borg, Nadal started out as a clay court specialist but eventually developed his game to the point that he could win on any surface--and, like Borg, Nadal was a prodigy, tying Borg's record by winning 16 professional singles titles as a teenager. Nadal is the second youngest player to win nine Grand Slam titles, trailing Borg by three months and requiring four more appearances than Borg did. Nadal owns a sparkling 9-2 record in Grand Slam Finals, he has won nine of the 26 Grand Slams that he has entered (34.6%) and he has a 120-17 career record in Grand Slam matches (87.6%).
Borg never faced Sampras or Federer, while Federer played Sampras just once, beating him at Wimbledon in 2001 to end Sampras' streak of four straight titles (and seven wins in eight years)--but Nadal enjoys a 14-7 head to head advantage over Federer and he has beaten Federer five times out of seven in Grand Slam Finals with victories at three different events (Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon). At first, "experts" dismissed Nadal's head to head dominance over Federer because many of those matches took place on clay--a distinction which never made sense, because if Federer is truly the greatest player then that should not matter--but now Nadal has proven that he can beat Federer on any surface at any time. If Federer had beaten Djokovic there is every reason to believe that Nadal would have added yet another win to his Federer ledger, so it is ironic that the criticism lobbed at Nadal early in his career--that his record versus Federer was padded because he usually lost at Wimbledon or the U.S. Open before running into Federer--could be directed at Federer regarding this year's U.S. Open.
Maybe Federer will finish his career with a flourish, winning a few more Grand Slams and narrowing the head to head gap with Nadal--but that seems doubtful. It is more likely that in the next three to five years Nadal will break Federer's career Grand Slam record--but let's forget about speculation for the moment and look at the facts as they stand now. Sampras had a great career but his ineptitude at the French Open means that he simply cannot be ranked ahead of Borg, Nadal or Federer. Borg had the shortest career of this quartet but he was the most dominant (in terms of his winning percentages) and he had to battle two of the 10 greatest players ever (Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe) while Federer won many of his Grand Slams before Nadal really hit his stride and without having to deal with another all-time great player at or near his prime. If Borg had captured just one U.S. Open title then his resume would have no gaps but the absence of that jewel from his collection stands in contrast to the career Grand Slams owned by Federer and Nadal.
Federer's artistry is very appealing to the eye and he broke Sampras' Grand Slam singles titles record just seven years after Sampras had set it, a surprising development considering that Sampras' predecessor Roy Emerson held the mark for 35 years, but Federer's overall Grand Slam record is not as dominant as Borg's nor has Federer simultaneously mastered Wimbledon and the French Open the way that Borg did.
After his victory over Djokovic, Nadal modestly deflected comparisons with Federer but the reality is that at this point there is no compelling reason to rank Federer ahead of Nadal on the all-time list: Nadal has accomplished more than Federer did at a comparable age, he has demonstrated that he can win a Grand Slam on any surface and there is that "little" matter of Nadal owning a decisive head to head advantage versus Federer, a statistic that simply cannot be diminished or ignored in light of how well Nadal has now filled out the rest of his resume.
Anyone who felt justified in calling Federer the greatest player of all-time circa 2006--when he was 25, had won eight Grand Slam singles titles and had yet to complete the career Grand Slam--must now accord the same deference to a 24 year old Nadal who owns nine Grand Slam singles titles and a career Grand Slam. Failing that, the "experts" could follow the path that I have recommended all along and refrain from crowning a mythical greatest player until the Federer-Nadal rivalry has completely run its course and we can examine each player's complete body of work.
23 comments:
i still rank federer best of open era. bjorg never won aus or us open. he dominated french and wimbledon. fed won all 4 and better clay court player than bjorg hard court. he got too 3 other french open finals if nadal wasnt there he got 4 or 5 french open nadal maybe the greatest clay court player all time. the winning percentage is because he played less tournaments and grand slams then fed has in his career so that is scude. fed was more dominant in prime head to head fed wins hard court french bjorg wimbledon toss up.
nadal was better at 24 then roger been was at same age he could pass roger if he keep on winning unlike bjorg he was great on all surfaces. he has not had better career right now then fed or bjorg he has to do it longer for me and pass fed grandslams. he has a couple years to do it.
- Tuesday, September 14, 2010 11:14:00 PM
- David Friedman said...
How can you rank Federer as the best when Nadal has the better head to head record, including a better head to head record in Grand Slam Finals? That makes no sense; it's like saying that Karl Malone was a better NBA champion than Michael Jordan.
It is more difficult to simultaneously dominate Wimbledon and the French Open than to do anything else in tennis because the surfaces at those events are so different, necessitating a radically different style of game to be successful.
Borg did not have a weakness for a particular surface; he won on grass and clay and there were just not that many events on hard courts at that time but he won titles on hard courts, too.
Borg only played the Australian once because it was just not that important during his era. He made the U.S. Open Final four times and, unlike Federer at the 2009 French Open, he did not have the advantage of not facing the best player in that round.
Borg's winning percentage is not skewed; it covers an eight year time period with 27 Slams, one more Slam than Nadal has currently played. Federer won seven Slams in his first 27 appearances. Borg's Grand Slam record matches up well with anyone's even without a U.S. Open title.
People were already calling Federer the greatest of all-time when he had accomplished less than Nadal has accomplished now. I will not overreact and say that Nadal is the greatest of all-time; all I am saying is that anyone who said in 2006 that Federer is the greatest has to be consistent and now say that Nadal is the greatest.
- Wednesday, September 15, 2010 2:59:00 AM
First, let me state that I fully agree that Nadal is currently on his way to being the greatest of all time and if he can stay fit for 3-4 more years, he should be there sooner than later.
However, as of now, I do not understand why should not Federer be considered as the greatest ever at least in the open era. Sampras never won the French Open & so should not be considered as the greatest ever. Borg won in only 2 different grand slams. Agreed that Australian Open was not considered important during his playing days, however he could not win the US Open too. If you say that he reached the US Open finals 4 times and that is good enough, why should Federer's French Open performance be considered "bad"?
Federer has reached the finals of each of the 4 grand slams at least 4 times, a feat that will be really tough for Nadal to emulate because after 8 years, he has reached the finals of 2 opens (US & Australian) only once.
Another count that can give us an idea about the all-round greatness of a player is the number of grand slams won in the surfaces other than his most favorite one. In this count, Federer has 10 (5U+4A+1F), Borg has 5(5W), Sampras has 7 (5U+2A) and Nadal has only 4 (2W+1A+1U) so far.
True, Nadal has the Olympic singles goal to his credit, but Federer has won 4 ATP World Tour Finals.
- Wednesday, September 15, 2010 1:08:00 PM
- David Friedman said...
You are completely ignoring the "inconvenient" fact that Nadal has dominated Federer head to head 14-7, including 5-2 in Grand Slam Finals--and those Grand Slam Finals victories took place at three different events, so it cannot be said that Nadal can only beat Federer on clay.
The number one problem with calling Federer the greatest has been the same for years and is only becoming a bigger and bigger issue as Nadal's dominance has expanded to all venues and surfaces: we have seen the so-called greatest repeatedly beaten by the same player--and this is not a situation where a mediocre player simply matches up well with Federer but does not accomplish anything else, because Nadal has outpaced Federer's accomplishments across the board (Grand Slam wins by age 24, achieving the career Grand Slam by that age, etc.).
Federer's body of work necessitates that his name be included in greatest player discussions but, ultimately, Nadal's dominance of Federer means that whatever rank one assigns to Federer has to be at least one below the rank assigned to Nadal.
Regarding comparisons to Borg, I don't consider Federer's French Open record to be "bad"--objectively speaking, it is about the same as Borg's U.S. Open record. Borg had the misfortune of having to deal with Connors and then McEnroe--who combined to win nine U.S. Opens in a 10 year period--while Federer snuck in one French Open title when Nadal was clearly operating at less than 100%.
Federer has played in 12 French Opens, reaching the Finals four times and losing in the first round three times. Federer's career match record at the French Open is 43-11 (79.6%). Borg played in nine U.S. Opens, reaching the Finals four times, never losing in the first round and reaching the quarterfinals seven times. Borg's career match record at the U.S. Open was 40-9 (81.6%), with five of those losses coming at the hands of Connors and McEnroe and one loss happening after he retired in the third set of a 1-1 match due to injury.
- Wednesday, September 15, 2010 3:02:00 PM
of nadal 14 wins 10 was on clay his fav surface he is 4-7 vs fed everywhere else. he dominates him on clay mainly, bjorg percentage is skewed its going to be higher than feds because he played less grand slams. fed 2003-2009 was better than any of the other three guys best 6 year run. fed wasnt dominate his first couple years which bring down his percentage but his prime was more dominant than all 3 guys. well see what nadal does and how many he has at end of career.
- Thursday, September 16, 2010 12:41:00 AM
- David Friedman said...
Nadal has beaten Federer on every conceivable surface now and owns a 5-2 edge in Grand Slam Finals, with wins at the Australian, French and Wimbledon. What else does Nadal have to do to prove to you that he owns Federer head to head?
No other alleged claimant to the title of greatest ever has been so soundly beaten by his main rival.
Regarding Borg, did you not read my answer? Borg won 11 out of 27. Federer won seven out of his first 27. Borg's percentage is not "skewed"; Borg's percentage reflects that he dominated Grand Slams during his era more than Federer has dominated Grand Slams during his era and, indeed, more than any other player has dominated Grand Slams during the Open Era: no one matches Borg's percentage.
The main difference between Borg's run and Federer's run is that Federer inflated his total with four Australian Open titles while Borg--and the other top players of his era--skipped that event.
- Thursday, September 16, 2010 1:45:00 AM
- David Friedman said...
Another way to look at the Borg-Federer comparison is that not only did Borg win 11 Grand Slams in his first (and only) 27 events while Federer only won seven Grand Slams in his first 27 events but Borg's closing kick was better than Federer's. You keep alluding to how Federer picked up steam in the second part of his career and you are right: he won nine Grand Slams in his next 19 events after going seven for 27--but Borg won nine Grand Slams in his final 16 events! During that span Borg skipped the 1977 French Open due to the bizarre organizational politics going on in tennis at that time, so considering that Borg had already won that title twice and would go on to win in the next (and final) four times that he entered it Borg could easily have gone 10 for 17!
Your suggestion that Federer at his peak was a more dominant Grand Slam performer than Borg is incorrect.
- Thursday, September 16, 2010 2:57:00 AM
from fed first grand slam he won 16 of last 29 at one point from 04-06 9 of 12. how was bjorg more dominant makes no sense? he was 0-17 from 98-02 so first 27 grand slams he wasnt really at his peak so that will favor bjorg. really they peaked at 2 diffrent times, they hard to compare bjorg had a slow start then dominant fed slow start then exploded for a 4 yeat stretch. but fed third stage of career is something that bjorg never had. he retired at 25 where fed is 29 been doing it for 12 years where he did it 7 years only. i dont know why bjorg retired but many felt mcenroe was fina dominant him and he left.
nadal beat him mainly on clay numbers back that up and nadal one of the all time great clay court players. nadal has to catch fed in majors before he better than him in career it makes no sense to say he is now.
- Friday, September 17, 2010 1:24:00 PM
- David Friedman said...
I don't know how else to explain "dominance" to you. Borg won 11 Slams in 27 appearances, which is the best such percentage in the sport's history. Borg went 9/16 in his final Grand Slam appearances. Federer has not been as dominant, nor has Federer demonstrated the kind of simultaneous Wimbledon/French Open mastery that Borg did.
Nadal is winning Grand Slams at a faster pace than Federer has and Nadal has shown that he can beat Federer on any surface and at any venue. I am not saying that Nadal must be called the greatest ever but I am saying that anyone who called Federer the greatest circa 2006 must say the same thing now about Nadal or he is being hypocritical, because Nadal has accomplished a lot more now than Federer had by that time.
- Friday, September 17, 2010 2:12:00 PM
Hey David. Great article!
But one question: what's wrong with having a nickname? Are you opposed to "The Great One" for Gretzky or "The Greatest" for Ali as well? Those have lasted for many years now and tennis is no less of a sport.
- Sunday, September 19, 2010 4:35:00 PM
- David Friedman said...
"Greatest Player of All-Time" is not a nickname--it is a title that was prematurely bestowed on Federer several years ago. Ali called himself "The Greatest" but he backed up that boast many times, beating the "unbeatable" Sonny Liston and George Foreman and taking two of his three bouts with Joe Frazier. In contrast, Federer was falsely labeled the greatest player at a time when he had neither surpassed Borg's simultaneous Wimbledon/French dominance nor had he found a way to consistently beat his top rival (Nadal). Nadal has proven that he can beat Federer at any venue and on any kind of surface. I'm not sure if Nadal is the greatest player of all-time but I don't understand how anyone can call Federer the greatest when he has a lopsided losing record against a contemporary player. We'll never know for sure what would have happened if Borg and Federer had played but we know exactly what has happened 14 out of 21 times that Federer played Nadal--Nadal beat him.
- Monday, September 20, 2010 4:10:00 AM
Best article (and follow up comments) ever, David!
- Thursday, September 30, 2010 9:36:00 AM
in tennis, you don't have to use the head to head records in order to rank someone. You have to look at the stats. In a grandlsam, we have 128 players that are competing. Howm many times Federer reached a slam final without facing Nadal? is it Federer's fault if Nadal haven't reached the final? I think that consistency should be the key when judging someone's career....23 semis in a row, 10 slams finals in a row,etc...If Nadal was to tie Federer's record for the most grand slams, i'm ready to anoint him as the greatest of all time.
- Saturday, October 02, 2010 3:52:00 PM
- David Friedman said...
You are not considering the entire picture. Federer holds the record for Grand Slam singles titles but this is equivalent to Emmitt Smith being the NFL's all-time leader in rushing yards; few, if any, NFL experts consider Smith to be the greatest running back ever because Jim Brown was much more dominant in terms of rushing titles, yards per attempt, yards per game, etc. As I noted in this and other articles, Borg was more dominant than Federer in terms of Grand Slam winning percentage. Furthermore, Nadal has won more Slams than Federer at a comparable age. Nadal has already accomplished more than Federer had accomplished when people began anointing Federer the greatest of all-time, so it is hard to understand why Nadal would not now be granted similar consideration--especially when Nadal has dominated Federer in a way that no one has ever dominated Nadal.
No one has refuted the very simple premise that I have offered for several years: how can Federer legitimately be called the greatest ever when he is not even clearly the greatest player of his own era?
- Sunday, October 03, 2010 12:04:00 AM
did you watch the atp masters in london, great tournament. the finals was a good match.
- Tuesday, November 30, 2010 11:49:00 PM
- David Friedman said...
No, I did not watch that event but I know that Federer had a very good performance versus Nadal in the championship match.
- Wednesday, December 01, 2010 3:08:00 PM
You have to look at the bigger picture, David. Nadal's career is not defined by the 22 matches he played against Federer (with a 14-8 record). All his other matches against all the other players count, as well.
And that's were Nadal falls just a little short. From 2004-6, Federer had a record of 277-15, won 8 of 12 Grand Slams, 13 of 21 Masters Series events and 34 of 49 tournaments. Nadal cannot come close to these numbers in any of these categories.
In addition, Nadal had a number of wipeout losses in Grand Slams to a number of lesser players in the middle of his prime - enduring beatdowns at the hands of Murray, Del Potro, Soderling, Gonzalez, Tsonga, Ferrer, Youzhny, etc. Federer just didn't suffer these bad losses in his prime.
Nadal may eventually become the more accomplished player and eclipse Federer's total of Grand Slam wins, but he will most likely fall short of the form Federer showed at his very best.
- Monday, December 06, 2010 4:47:00 PM
- David Friedman said...
My articles about Borg, Sampras, Federer and Nadal "looked at the bigger picture"--and that picture shows that Nadal has accomplished more at a younger age than Federer did and that Nadal enjoys a decisive head to head advantage over Federer, including Grand Slam victories on multiple surfaces.
Can you name one other sport or endeavor in which one top level competitor regularly bests another but the latter is widely termed to be the greatest ever? We are not talking about Federer having a matchup problem on one surface in a small sample size of matches versus an otherwise undistinguished player; that kind of circumstance could be dismissed as a fluke. Nadal has dominated Federer and Nadal has backed up that dominance by becoming the number one player in the world while winning each Grand Slam at least once, in addition to many other tournament victories.
I did not agree with those who prematurely crowned Federer the greatest of all-time several years ago and I will not make the same mistake of crowning Nadal now but I do insist that all those people who lauded Federer back then should be consistent and thus offer similar praise to Nadal.
"The bigger picture" actually indicates that Borg, in the context of his era (when players did not regularly play in the Australian Open and other conditions were different as well), has at least as good of a claim to be considered the greatest of all-time (or at least the greatest of the Open Era) as Federer or Nadal.
- Monday, December 06, 2010 6:25:00 PM
I don't think Sampras is even in the conversation as he never won more than 2 slams in a year, finished with fewer slams than Federer and never came close to approaching the level of dominance that we've seen from either Federer or Nadal.
Borg is one of the great "what if" stories, but the fact is that he quit when he was still young - that has to be held against him. He finished his career with at least a handful of majors behind Federer. I don't think he's ever won 95% of his matches over a 3-year period either.
Nadal does have the chance to surpass Federer in the number of Grand Slams, and become the most accomplished player of all time. He'll never match Federer's 3-year run of brilliance but he's provided his own special brand of tennis.
Federer peaked late. Nadal peaked early, and it remains to be seen if he can maintain his form for a few more years. But if he is to surpass Federer's count in Grand Slams, he'll have to avoid those losses to lesser players that's plagued him throughout his career, until a breakthrough 2010.
- Monday, December 06, 2010 11:15:00 PM
- David Friedman said...
As I have repeatedly mentioned, I just do not understand why some people place so much emphasis on total Grand Slams won. Do you think that Emmitt Smith is the greatest running back ever just because he has the most career rushing yards? You have to consider the context of a player's career plus his dominance relative to his era.
Borg won at least one Grand Slam in eight straight years (1974-81). He pulled off the Wimbledon-French double an unprecedented three years in a row (1978-80) and when he retired he was the modern career leader in both Wimbledon singles titles (five) and French Open singles titles (six, a mark he still holds). Borg won 11 of the 27 Grand Slams he entered, the best such percentage ever. Borg also owns the best career winning percentage for Grand Slam matches. An important part of Borg's career that is rarely mentioned is his great success in Davis Cup play. Borg is hardly merely a "what if" story; he has bona fide credentials as arguably the greatest Open Era male tennis player, while the "what if" only consists of speculation about how much more he could have added to his legacy had he played another four or five years: it is certainly reasonable to speculate that he would have won at least three more French Opens, one more Wimbledon and very possibly the U.S. Open title that he had narrowly missed on several occasions (including back to back Finals losses in his last two appearances in that event).
It is very difficult to place into proper context the accomplishments of players who competed in different eras under different conditions but Borg's accomplishments in his era stack up very well against any other Open Era tennis player's feats.
The interesting thing about Federer and Nadal is that we can compare them because they are contemporaries who have faced each other nearly two dozen times in addition to competing under the same rules and against similar common opponents. Nadal has exceeded what Federer achieved by the same age while amassing a decisive head to head advantage, so it is baffling that anyone would insist that Federer must be ranked ahead of Nadal at this point.
- Tuesday, December 07, 2010 5:09:00 AM
Man, what happened to Nadal? Disappointing loss. Alas, the ability to stay healthy is part of the game and it will ultimately decide whether Nadal will catch Federer's record total in Grand Slams.
Nadal, when he's healthy, is almost unbeatable. Unfortunately he's had constant health issues throughout his career and it reared its ugly head once again. It's the injuries and the frequent wipeout losses at Grand Slams - the one vs. Ferrer being the latest - that will keep the Federer vs. Nadal debate alive for another day.
Let's hope Nadal will return to health soon.
- Wednesday, January 26, 2011 1:52:00 PM
- David Friedman said...
Nadal has been healthy enough to win more Grand Slams by the age of 25 than anyone in tennis history except for Borg, to win three Grand Slams in a row on three different surfaces (no one has won four in a row since Laver won a calendar year Grand Slam in 1969) and to build a huge lead over Federer in the ATP rankings.
- Wednesday, January 26, 2011 3:07:00 PM
Now that Federer is out as well, I wonder when we'll be seeing the articles: "Federer and Nadal are washed-up has-beens" and "Djokovic and Murray headline the new era in tennis".
It's sad to see how short-sighted journalism has become, but that's a sign of the era that we live in.
If Murray or Djokovic (or someone else) wins a handful of majors over the next 2-3 years, people will be quick to proclaim theat player as the "greatest player of all time". And I'm sure the head-to-head vs. Nadal and Federer during that period will be used as "evidence" that the player is the "best ever".
Of course it would be ridiculous and premature, just like it was premature to crown Federer as the "best ever" after he won 6 slams and just like it is to crown Nadal as the "best ever" after he won 9 slams. But it will happen, and legends of yesteryear will be quickly forgotten.
As for Nadal and Federer, let's see if they have something left in their tanks. Age and health are the big concerns and it would be a shame if the Australian Open was indeed the beginning of the end.
- Friday, January 28, 2011 1:28:00 PM


text:
We use cookies to give you the best possible experience on our site. By continuing to use the site you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more.
From history to philosophy, travel journals to cookery books, The Folio Society publishes only the best in non-fiction. Each non-fiction book features carefully selected photographs and illustrations. Whether your interests lie in the sciences, the arts, or both, you'll be able to find the perfect book in the best hardcover bindings.


text:
Superenalotto is the national lottery of Italy. One of the oldest lotteries in Europe, the Superenalotto began in the 1950's known simply as 'enalotto'. Since the inception of the Superenalotto in 1997 it has been the most popular national Italian lottery. The key reasons for this are that the Superenalotto has amongst the largest jackpots in the world and the lowest odds of winning. It's a combination that works.
To take part in the Superenalotto draw you need to pick 6 out of 90 possible. The top tier prize is awarded to anyone who has correctly picked 6 numbers. There is an option to play with a bonus ball but these are different versions of the Superenalotto draw (such as Jolly number which only comes into play if you have matched 5 out 6 possible). You can choose between buying a single ticket or pooling together and joining a group game.
|Winning Odds
|6 Superenalotto balls
|1 in 258,890,850
|5 Superenalotto balls + Jolly
|1 in 20,492,204
|4 Superenalotto balls
|1 in 739,688
|3 Superenalotto balls
|1 in 52,835
|2 Superenalotto balls
|1 in 10,720
|1 Superenalotto balls
|1 in 766
The History of Superenalotto goes all the way back to the 1950's. Back then it was simply known as 'enalotto', it wasn't until 1997, with the growth of national lotteries around Europe, that the Italian enalotto was modified and the Superenalotto was created. Since 1997 the lottery has been a great success due to its popularity, frequency of the draws and high jackpots.
Min jackpot 1,300,000EUR
Record Jackpot 177,700,000 EUR
If you win over €500 on the Superenalotto you will be required to pay an Italian tax of six percent. Players residing outside Italy should meet with a qualified financial adviser if they win a large SuperEnalotto prize, as taxes in their own location may apply to their winnings.
Players have 90 days to claim prizes. This is relevant to all tier prizes, not just the jackpot. For online players who played SuperEnalotto via a ticketing service and won a prize, you will be sent an email shortly after the draw which notifies you of your win.
The best way to increase your odds with the Superenalotto is to buy group game tickets, It's simply logic & math. When you buy group game tickets what happens is that you 'pool together' your tickets with other players and therefore increase your odds instantly.
This group of 50 tickets is then split into 100 shares and each share can be sold separately, this way the player can buy a share in a group of 50 tickets for a prices much cheaper, as little as $0.16 per ticket. If one of the group's ticket is a winner then the winning amount will be split according to how many shares you have in the group. This means that instead of €5 getting you one or two tickets, through a group game the same €5 will get you closer to 30 lines. That's 30 chances to win for the price of two tickets!


text:
This is not an offer for credit and should be used for estimation purposes only based on the information you provided. You should not base your decision on this estimate alone. Title, registration, tax and other fees, and personal circumstances such as employment status and personal credit history, were not considered in the calculations.
Front / Rear - Disc
Parking - Front Brake Lock
Front - 22 x 7-10
Rear - 22 x 10-10
Digital - Fuel Gauge, Speedometer, Odometer, Trip meter, Clock
Drive Indicator (Neutral / Reverse), High Beam Indicator, Engine Service Indicator, High-Temperature Light
Headlight - Dual
Taillight - Dual
Front - Dual A-Arm; 5 in. travel
Rear - Swing Arm; 5 in. travel
Shocks - Preload Adjustable
Front Rack - Standard / 50 lbs.
Rear Rack - Standard / 70 lbs.


text:
Mild-mannered neonatal intensive care dietitian Douglas Drenckpohl is a veggie warrior. He advocates on behalf of vegetables, especially the most downtrodden.
Mild-mannered neonatal intensive care dietitian Douglas Drenckpohl is a veggie warrior. He advocates on behalf of vegetables, especially the most downtrodden.
It's a losing battle to crinkle your nose at kohlrabi, rutabaga, shiitake, okra, turnips, broccoli, Swiss chard or parsnips. Drenckpohl battles not only with science, but with taste.
He's written professional journal articles on the dietary benefits of vegetables. He cites empirical evidence from years modifying formula for struggling newborns. He used a puree of green beans added to formula to help local newborn twins surmount critical digestive problems. Today the twins, 4, are thriving. They still love green beans.
Drenckpohl spent the past few months tweaking and perfecting recipes for soup purees, elevating the most marginalized vegetables to star status.
He sighed mournfully when discussing the Thanksgiving classic of green beans, fried onion rings and cream of mushroom soup casserole: "It's not a vegetable! It's the transformation of nutritious, low-calorie foods into a high-fat dish with very little nutritional value."
For his Thanksgiving contribution to his sister's holiday meal, he plans to take his pureed corn and rutabaga chowder. His two nephews and brother-in-law are critical judges, but Drenckpohl feels confident this year.
"Great taste," he said. "Not overpowering."
During months of development, his pureed soup recipes were tested by colleagues in the neonatal intensive care unit at OSF Saint Francis Medical Center Children's Hospital of Illinois. For the most part, these are meat-and-potato people. Their responses often sent Drenckpohl back to the kitchen for further tweaking.
His revisions often sent them back to the soup pot for seconds or thirds.
"They ate a lot of soup," he said about his research and development process.
When his recipes were perfected, he invited the children of colleague Deb Boisen for a final test. He knew the recipes passed the muster with adults, but were they kid-worthy?
Spencer Boisen, 4, and Sophie Jo Boisen, 3, arrived at Drenckpohl's place after a morning field trip with their day care.
As Drenckpohl prepared pureed tomato and eggplant soup for them, he suggested new parents break with the American cultural tradition of introducing babies to solid foods with fruit. He recommends vegetables first.
"When fruits are introduced first, children become used to sweetness," he said. "There is no reason to give apple juice. Start babies with vegetables first, and I don't mean just peas, carrots and green beans."
Diversity peaks interest, he said. Children and adults become bored with the same vegetable repertoire. He advocates expanding to broccoli, parsnips, eggplant, turnips, leeks, rutabaga, squash, red peppers, sweet potatoes and more.
A Drenckpohl credo: Don't flavor children's vegetables with salt.
"For kids, flavor vegetables with garlic or lemon with a little olive oil. Or canola oil, which is flavor free. Try herbs. Fresh basil provides a lot of flavor without salt," he said. "Parents need to avoid introducing salty foods to children."
Vegetables also help children feel full. On average, a cup of fruit is 60 calories but a cup of vegetables is only 20 calories.
"Children can eat fruit and in half an hour they are hungry," he said. "Vegetables, rich in fiber, help children feel full longer."
Another Drenckpohl caveat: Parents should avoid predisposing children against certain vegetables.
"Don't tell your children you dislike certain vegetables. Children mimic their parents," he said, recalling his nephews first reaction when he made them eggplant Parmesan.
"I'm not eating that!" both boys said.
"My nephews never had eggplant Parmesan, but they assumed they didn't like it," he said.
Drenckpohl took a pot of pureed potato-turnip soup to work, and the nurses loved it.
"I didn't tell them there were turnips in it," he said. "People think they don't like turnips."
His pureed roasted vegetable soup is especially loved by people.
"The high heat of roasting caramelizes and enriches the flavor of vegetables," he said. "Don't limit the vegetables you give children. When people only eat corn, peas and green beans, they get bored with vegetables. If your child loves macaroni and cheese, make it with whole wheat pasta or spaghetti squash."
He objects to the newest trend by food companies of promoting snacks that are, in fact, "mini meals."
Spencer and Sophie Jo were tired after a morning of running through pumpkin fields. Their mother, a neonatal nurse, apologized for some pumpkin cupcakes they had just eaten at pre-school. She said her children love macaroni and cheese. Spencer likes raw carrots with dip.
Spencer wanted to chase Drenckpohl's cat, Madison, who fled to the next room.
Deb Boisen marshaled her children and positioned Spencer and Sophie Jo at the table. The children eyed Drenckpohl warily as he brought them steaming bowls of pureed eggplant-tomato soup.
They examined the soup carefully. Sophie Jo was not interested in tasting it and slid back in her mother's lap. Spencer reached for his spoon.
"Blow. Hot," his mother said.
Spencer blew, licked the soup cautiously, blew more. Finally, one spoonful, then another and another.
"It's good!" he said, sensing the triumph of the moment.
Clare Howard can be reached at 686-3250 or email@example.com.
Potato and Turnip Soup
2 leeks, chopped
1 medium onion, chopped
4 Tablespoons of unsalted butter
1 clove garlic, minced
2 lbs of turnips, peeled, chopped
2 lbs of potatoes, peeled, chopped
2 quarts chicken stock
Salt and pepper
Place butter in a large pot and cook until melted. Add leeks and onions and saute over medium heat until soft. Season with salt and pepper as desired.
Add turnips and potatoes to leeks and onion mixture and cook for 5 minutes. Stir frequently to prevent sticking. Add chicken stock and garlic and simmer until turnips and potatoes are thoroughly cooked, about 15 minutes.
Puree in a blender until smooth or pass through a food mill. Season to taste with salt and pepper. (If too thick for your taste, add one pint of Half & Half).
Makes 6-8 servings. Per serving: 311 calories; 17.3 grams protein; 9.9 grams fat (28.6 percent of total calories); 38.2 grams carbohydrate; 5 gram fiber; 21 milligrams cholesterol; and 1,897 milligrams sodium.
Tomato and Eggplant Soup
2 small or 1 large eggplant, peeled and chopped into 1 inch cubes
1 medium onion, peeled, chopped
1/3 cup olive oil
1 red pepper, chopped
4 1 pound 12 ounces canned whole tomatoes
4 large cloves garlic, chopped
3 ounces fresh basil leaves
2 quarts chicken stock
In a large pot, add olive oil and heat until hot. Add onion and cook until soft. Add red pepper and eggplant. Cook until eggplant is tender approximately 5 minutes. Add 4 cans of whole tomatoes with juice, garlic and basil leaves. Add chicken stock. Bring to a boil then reduce heat and simmer for 20-30 minutes.
Puree in a blender until smooth or pass through a food mill. Then pass soup through a strainer to remove seeds. Can serve immediately or chill and reheat when desired.
Makes 8 to 10 servings. Per serving: 176 calories; 11.2 grams protein; 10.5 grams fat (53.9 percent of total calories); 9.1 grams carbohydrate; 2.7 grams fiber; 3 milligrams cholesterol; and 1,400 milligrams sodium.
Corn and Rutabaga Chowder
6 ounces Tofu Taco Meat
1/3 cup vegetable oil
1 medium onion, peeled, diced
1 medium green pepper, minced
1 medium red pepper, minced
1/2 cup flour
2 quarts vegetable broth
3 pounds corn kernels
2 pounds rutabaga, peeled
1 bay leaf
Salt and pepper
1 quart Fat Free Half & Half
In a large pot, add oil and heat until hot. Add tofu taco meat and cook
for 5 minutes. Stir frequently. Add onions, green pepper, and red pepper (it's helpful to mince onions and peppers in food processor). Cook until onions are tender approximately 5-8 minutes. Add flour and cook until ingredients form a roux-like consistency.
Add vegetable broth and whisk to work out any lumps. Simmer for about 20 minutes. Puree 2 pounds of corn. Add to soup with remaining whole kernel corn. Puree rutabaga and add to soup mixture along with bay leaf. Bring to a boil then simmer for 25-30 minutes. Remove bay leaf. Soup can be chilled and served at a later date.
When ready to serve, simmer and add Half & Half to soup. Season with salt and pepper as desired.
(Can use chicken stock in place of vegetable stock. Also, may use ground pork sausage instead of tofu taco meat)
Makes 10 to 12 servings. Per serving: 428 calories; 15.6 grams protein; 12.2 grams fat (25.3 percent of total calories); 64.3 grams
carbohydrate; 8.9 grams fiber; 2 milligrams cholesterol; and 1,251 milligrams sodium.
Broccoli and Parsnip Soup
4 pounds fresh broccoli, peeled, chopped
6 ounces vegetable oil
1 pound parsnips, peeled, chopped
1 medium onion, chopped
2 leeks, chopped
1/2 cup flour
2 quarts chicken stock
1 quart Fat Free Half & Half
Salt and pepper
Add oil to a large pot and heat until hot. Add onions and leeks and cook until soft. Add flour and cook until a blond roux forms, about 5-10 minutes.
Add chicken stock and whisk to work out any lumps. Bring soup to a boil then reduce heat and simmer for 20-25 minutes. Add broccoli and parsnips and simmer until vegetables are tender, about 30-40 minutes. Stir frequently.
Puree soup and strain soup through a sieve for a smooth consistency. Can serve soup immediately or chill soup until later date. Before serving soup, add Half & Half and simmer until warm. Add salt and pepper until desired taste.
Makes 10 to 12 servings. Per serving: 352 calories; 17.5 grams protein; 18.4 grams fat (46.5 percent of total calories); 29.6 grams
carbohydrate; 7.7 grams fiber; 3 milligrams cholesterol; and 1,241 milligrams sodium.
Roasted Vegetable Soup
1 pound carrots, peeled, chopped
1 pound parsnips, peeled, chopped
1 large sweet potato, peeled, chopped
1 small (2 lb.) butternut squash, peeled, seeded
3 Tablespoons olive oil
2 quarts chicken stock
1 1/2 teaspoons salt
1/2 teaspoon pepper
2 Tablespoons parsley, chopped
Preheat oven to 425 degrees. Cut vegetables into 1 inch cubes. Place vegetables in a single layer on 2 sheet pans. Drizzle olive oil, salt and pepper.
Bake for 25-35 minutes. Add vegetables to blender with some chicken stock and puree. Add vegetable puree to pot and add remaining chicken stock. Season with salt and pepper as desired. Add parsley. Heat soup until hot.
If soup is too thick, may add more chicken stock until desired consistency.
Makes 6 to 8 servings. Per serving: 308 calories; 16.6 grams protein; 9.5 grams fat (27.9 percent of total calories); 38.9 grams carbohydrate; 7.9 grams fiber; 3 milligrams cholesterol; and 1,835 milligrams sodium.
(This last recipe is from the Barefoot Contessa Ina Garten.)


text:
In the 1980s, Dr. Olweus conducted the first systematic intervention study against bullying in the world, which documented a number of quite positive effects of what is now the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP). He was also the first to study the problem of bullying of students by teachers. Since 2001, he has been the leader of a government-initiated national initiative implementing OBPP on a large-scale basis in Norwegian elementary and junior high schools.
Dr. Olweus is generally recognized as a pioneer and founding father of research on bullying problems and as a world-leading expert in this area both by the research community and by society at large. His book Bullying at School: What We Know and What We Can Do has been translated into fifteen different languages. Dr. Olweus has received a number of awards and recognitions for his research and intervention work, including the "Distinguished Contributions to Public Policy for Children" award by the Society for Research in Child Development (SRCD). He has been a fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences (CASBS) in Stanford, California.
1-800-328-9000 (USA and Canada)
Office hours 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.(CT)
© 1949-2019 Hazelden, All rights reserved.
Get to Know Us
Privacy Policy
Terms of Use
Addiction Treatment
Resell Our Products
Let Us Help You
Contact Us
Mail-in Order Form
Hazelden Locations
Product Training
Manuscript Submission
Event Calendar
eProducts and Services
Mobile Apps
Partners Program
Hazelden Webinars
Earn CE Hours Online
Bookstore Home


text:
All images copyrighted by designer
Photographed homes may have been modified from original design. Construction plans are provided as per renderings.
© copyright by designerFirst Floor Plan:
© copyright by designerSecond Floor Plan:
Stories: 1.5
Total Living Area: 2245 Sq. Ft.
First Floor: 1720 Sq. Ft.
Second Floor: 525 Sq. Ft.
Bonus: 224 Sq. Ft.
Bedrooms: 3
Full Baths: 2, Half Baths: 1
Width: 68 Ft. Depth: 57 Ft. 6 In.
Garage Size: 2
Foundation: Basement, Crawl Space, ICF - Basement (Insul. Conc. Forms), ICF - Slab (Insul. Conc Forms), Slab Foundation
Get Your House Plans In Minutes!NEW PDFs NOW!™ Plan packages available. Simply place your order, electronically sign the license agreement, and receive your PDFs within minutes in your inbox!
Plan Specifications
A covered wrap-around porch and lovely arched windows give this home a comfortable country style. The attached garage is set way back to minimize it's impact and help retain the classic farmhouse appeal. The huge Great Room features an 18-ft. vaulted ceiling, a dramatic wall of windows and a fireplace set into a media wall for ease of furnishing. Ample counter space and a convenient work island allow maximum use of the roomy kitchen, which looks out to the vaulted breakfast room. Sliding french doors lead to a lovely covered rear porch. On the other side of the home, a dramatic bay window and a 10-ft. ceiling highlight the master bedroom. Two bedrooms and a bath on the second floor are accessed from a dramatic balcony that overlooks the great room.


text:
Search Constraints
You searched for: Format Shapefile Remove constraint Format: Shapefile Publisher California. Department of Transportation Remove constraint Publisher: California. Department of Transportation Subject Traffic flow Remove constraint Subject: Traffic flow Subject Traffic density Remove constraint Subject: Traffic density Data type Point Remove constraint Data type: Point Year 2014 Remove constraint Year: 2014
1 entry found
Search Results
1. Traffic Volume, California, 2014
2014. California. Department of Transportation. This point shapefile contains traffic volume (also known as traffic counts) on California's state highway network created from 2014 Average Annual ... California. Department of Transportation.


text:
All models shown with this site were 18 years old or older when the pictures and videos were created.
Our website is not a producer (primary or secondary) of any and all the content located on the website umedia.press. With respect to the records as per 18 USC 2257 for any and all content found on this website, please kindly direct your demand to the site for which the this content was produced.
Our website is a video sharing site by which allows for the uploading, sharing and standard viewing various kinds of adult content and while our website will the best it can with verifying compliance, it may possibly not be 100% accurate.
Our website abides by the following procedures to make certain complying:
- Requiring all users to be 18 years old to upload videos.
- When uploading, user must verify the content; make sure she / he's 18 years old; certify that this individual he / she keeps data of the models in the content and that they are over 18 years old.
To get further assistance and as well as or information in finding the content's originating site, please contact our website compliance via Contact Form.
If you find inappropriate content please contact us. Should any content be flagged as unlawful, unlawful, harassing, harmful, unpleasant or several other reasons, umedia.press shall remove it from the site straight away.


text:
CNN reports some hilarious news:
Rick Santorum will launch a drive against the nomination of former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel as Defense secretary, CNN has learned.
Santorum really is the hawkish gift that keeps on giving. If there is one current or former elected official other than John McCain who embodies everything wrong with the Republican Party's current foreign policy thinking, it would have to be Rick Santorum. It's appropriate that Santorum is launching an anti-Hagel campaign, because he is in some important respects the anti-Hagel in terms of temperament and foreign policy views. Where Hagel was a grudging supporter and later critic of the Iraq war, Santorum was an unflinching supporter of the invasion and occupation, and he remains so until now. As wary of war as Hagel can be because of his experience in combat, Santorum is the classic example of the heedless activist/ideologue whose obsession with talking about foreign policy issues is equaled only by his staggering ignorance of the rest of the world.
Faced with the debacle in Iraq, Santorum not only failed to learn anything from that, but railed against the Bush administration for being insufficiently aggressive towards Iran and other countries. The disaster in Iraq caused Hagel to become more skeptical and prudent about the use of force. Santorum concluded from the same experience that the U.S. needed to become even more confrontational in its dealings with every pariah state and the major authoritarian powers. Santorum's re-election bid in 2006 was always going to be difficult, but he ensured that a likely loss turned into the most humiliating rout of an incumbent Senator ever by making the election a referendum on his fanatical foreign policy views.
Instead of being chastened by the overwhelming repudiation of those views, Santorum intensified his support for reckless and militaristic policies. He was bound to be opposed to Hagel's nomination. There has scarcely been one sound idea related to foreign policy and the military that Santorum hasn't opposed. The GOP has a choice in the coming years on foreign policy: it can become more like Santorum or it can become more like Hagel. If the party chooses the former, its political fortunes over the long term will be every bit as bright as Santorum's.
P.S. In case anyone has forgotten, one of Santorum's last votes was to oppose Robert Gates, who was at that time Bush's nominee for Secretary of Defense.


text:
Obama's inauguration The 44th President: Jan. 20, 2009
Local wagon in parade
"Plum tickled" is how Don Werner describes the feeling of having one of his wagons on display in Inaugural Parade on Jan. 20. While having one of his wagons roll down Pennsylvania Avenue is a first for Don, he and his wife Connie are regulars on Massachusetts Street during Lawrence's Old-Fashioned Christmas Parade.
From Old-Fashioned parade to Obama
Don and Connie Werner have been in all kinds of wagon shows and parades, inlcuding Lawrence's Old-Fashioned Christmas Parade. But the couple never imagined one of their wagons would be used to help welcome Barack Obama to the presidency.
This green custom-made hitch wagon, built by Horton resident Don Werner, will roll from the U.S. Capitol to the White House during the Inauguration Day parade. The wagon was purchased by McCrossan Boys Ranch in Sioux Falls, S.D., where this picture was taken.
Wagon made in NE Kansas in parade for inauguration
For years, Don and Connie Werner have led the Lawrence Old-Fashioned Christmas Parade down Massachusetts Street in their covered wagon. On Jan. 20, one of Don's handcrafted wagons will parade down a much bigger street: Pennsylvania Avenue. "We are just elated, just plum tickled about that," said Don, who owns Horton-based Werner Wagon Works along with his wife.
- Wagons in the works January 16, 2009
- On the Wagon January 16, 2009


text:
|Previous Page | Table of Contents | Index | Next Page
Information for
Electronic payee statements.(p3)
More information.(p3)
Short-Term Obligations
If you sell the obligation for the owner before maturity, you must file Form 1099-B to reflect the gross proceeds to the seller. Do not report the accrued discount to the date of sale on either Form 1099-INT or Form 1099-OID.
Form 1099-OID.(p4)
Figuring OID.(p4)
|Using Section I.(p4)
|Using the income tax regulations.(p4)
Certificates of Deposit(p4)
Bearer Bonds and Coupons(p4)
Backup Withholding(p4)
Short-term obligations.(p5)
Long-term obligations.(p5)
|Registered long-term obligations with cash payments.(p5)
|Payee not the original owner.(p5)
|Bearer long-term obligations with cash payments.(p5)
Sales and redemptions.(p5)
Payments outside the United States to U.S. person.(p5)
Payments to foreign person.(p5)
|U.S.-source amount.(p5)
|Foreign-source amount.(p5)
|More information.(p5)
|Previous Page | Table of Contents | Top of Page | Index | Next Page


text:
Read anywhere, anytime
Our Catalogue
Juan Carlos Ortiz
Legal information: rental price per page €. This information is given for information only in accordance with current legislation.
Access to the YouScribe library is required to read this work in full.
Discover the services we offer to suit all your requirements!
Access Activated
You now have access to hundreds of thousands
of digital books and documents!
Do not forget to download our app so you can read
even if you are not connected to the Internet


text:
Here is a fun and easy way to prepare an Easter Bunny small world play area for your preschool children during Easter.
Children enjoy sharing stories from their lives and bringing in items from home to share with their friends. The class book I celebrate by… is a perfect resource for sharing aspects of students' holiday traditions in the classroom.
Help your child prepare for the transition from preschool to kindergarten with some fun and entertaining learning activities that will jumpstart his or her literacy skills needed for kindergarten. Our fun, innovative ABC Twiggles resources and free Story Twiggle books will provide your children opportunities to gain self confidence and to develop the literacy skills they need to be successful i
Children love to help bake cookies. In this Twiggle Book children read about the the tools and steps that are needed to make cookies. Lily and Twiggi gather together the materials and ingredients they will need. Then, they mix, roll, cut, bake, and decorate until they have a delicious treat!
Young children will learn that eating healthy foods and exercise keep our bodies healthy and strong. Twiggi, Lily, and their friends are having fun in the sun, but Raccoon stays inside to eat his favorite foods (cake, hamburger, and fries) and doesn't move from his place while watching TV.
Choo-Choo! All aboard! Meet Tina the Tiny Train. Children will have fun learning to tell time as a train picks up different objects whose names begin with the letter t, such as a tiger, a tulip, a trumpet, and a tomato. It's also a great book to introduce your children to the initial consonant blend /tr/ sound.
Children will have fun learning about octopuses as they complete the online book activities. They will learn scientific vocabulary such as the word "camouflage" as they delve deep under the ocean to read about five little octopuses that change colors and then disappear, until eventually there are none.
Lily and her dog Bud are best friends and are having fun playing together in the sun. After Bud jumps in some mud, Lily scrubs Bud in the tub until he is clean.
Whoo, whoo - it's you! Children will have a hooting good time and become wiser about owls, nocturnal animals, and learn the shape of the letter O.
Story Twiggles
Discover the our new online digital emergent reader ebook (Twiggle Books) for preschool and kindergarten. Enjoy our selection of free Twiggle Books:
In the Easter Egg Farm by Mary Jane Auch, chicken farmer Mrs. Pennyworth discovers that one of her hens, Pauline, doesn't produce eggs of...
KidsSoup Resource Library Membership
Gain unlimited access to our KidsSoup Resource Library member site with more than 10,000 activities and resources for preschool and kindergarten.
KidsSoup Resource Library
ABC Twiggles Membership
Preschool Activities: Media Root
Story Twiggles Membership
Sign Up for Our Free KidsSoup Newsletter
We are here to save you time and money...
ABC Twiggles Letters of the Alphabet...
© 2004-2020, KidsSoup®, Inc. All rights reserved.


text:
Recently, Samsung has received a lot of criticism from the Android modding community and developers for the relatively closed source nature of its Exynos platform. The Exynos platform powers all the high-end products from Samsung including the Galaxy S3 and the Note 2, and the closed source nature of the platform hinders development for these devices.
After a lot of complaints and negative feedback, Samsung promised that it is looking into the situation of open-sourcing its Exynos platform.
Today, the company announced via its Twitter account that it will be open-sourcing the "integrated source code" of its Exynos 4 family of processors by the end of 2012. The company will also setup a git server which will be available to the public by November 2012.
Don't jump to any conclusions and start praising Samsung here. The company will only be open-sourcing the source code for its OrigenBoard development board. The problem is that CyanogenMod developers still need the source code for other parts of the phone such as the Yamaha audio chip on the Galaxy S2, the Camera on the S3 and more to get a stable AOSP ROM on the S3 and the S2.
Until and unless Samsung open-sources or release AOSP compatible binaries for other closed source parts used on its handsets, getting a stable AOSP ROM on Exynos powered Samsung devices is going to be quite a challenge for developers.


text:
0 item($0.00) ·
Check out
is on back order
Personalized wedding handkerchief with a beautiful flower garland design, with customized monogram of bride and groom and wedding date. Handkerchief is pictured with an antique style flower garland illustration. Handkerchief can also be personalized with a short poem, scripture, personal note or other wording of your choice. Great wedding gift from bride to mother of bride or mother of groom, bridesmaid, maid of honor, grandma, aunt, best friend, matron of honor, or to the hostess, flower girl or birthday girl.
Details: Made of 100% silk fabric, in cream; measures about 10x10 inches. Hankies are individually packaged in a cellophane bag. They are digitally printed (no image transfers or embroidery) with permanent textile inks. Handkerchiefs have a hand painted edge in metallic fabric paint, with straight or scalloped hand cut edging. Hankies are gently hand washable.
Turnaround time: 2 business days for initial layout, 1 b. day each round of changes and 2 b. days for production once layout is approved.
Please see chart for printed color and font options, and paint chart for edge options.
Gift boxes may be purchased separately.
Custom made to order. Hand crafted in a small studio in Vermont, USA from domestic or imported materials. Exclusively at Artful Beginnings.
Copyright © 2020 Artful Beginnings. Ecommerce Software by Shopify.


text:
In order to harness the power of nature to catch a wave, one must be fully aware of the present moment. Aligning mind, breath and body to paddle at the right time, to pop-up at the exact moment required to drop in and ride that wave. Each wave provides you with a fresh opportunity to forget about everything else that's going on in your life and simply focus on that connection with the water for a brief moment—this is mindfulness in its purest form.
We all remember the simple pleasure of curling up on the couch or lounging in a hammock with a great book. For your reading pleasure, we've assembled a collection of ten books including options for the whole family—young to old, surfers and non-surfers alike. It is our hope that one of these might brighten your day, enrich your mind and help you maintain your vital link to the water.


text:
Better Electroless Nickel
I heard of a new electroless nickel process that gives you many more turnovers of metal compared to conventional electroless nickel processes.
I heard of a new electroless nickel process that gives you many more turnovers of metal compared to conventional electroless nickel processes. Is this true and if so, where can I find more information on the process? A.B.
Over the years, different approaches have been investigated in the hopes of finding an electroless nickel process that will have a longer life and will allow for additional metal turnovers. In my experience a standard electroless nickel bath will give you between 5–7 turnovers before it must be dumped and replaced with a new bath.
Featured Content
The chemistry of electroless nickel is fairly complex. As the electroless nickel bath ages the concentration of by-products, sulfate, sodium and hypophosphite ions, increases. The increase of these by-products causes the bath to lose its functionality. If these impurities can preferentially be removed, you should be able to use the bath for longer periods of time.
A number of different approaches have been attempted to do exactly this. Bleed and feed, selective ion exchange and different chemistries have all been tried for solving this problem. There are drawbacks to all of these processes.
A newer approach and one that looks like it can be very useful is to use electrodialysis to remove these by-products. A paper presented at the 2005 Sur/Fin conference in St. Louis, The EDEN System for Electroless Nickel Bath Life Extension and Consistent Quality, 2005 Sur/Fin Proceedings, Track IV—Electroless Plating, discusses this approach. This methodology appears to be able to give you unlimited bath extension. In one particular case study, more than 2,000 metal turnovers were achieved. The above referenced paper has a complete discussion on this methodology.


text:
It be Wednesday…
Productive Leigh is getting miffed off with the news recently. It seems that the news people have just returned from Iraq and need to save money, so are now being sent to the wet South West of the UK to report live from floods and high tides. Leigh almost died due to a gas explosion [60 miles away], and Ben has started a new IT course. John Coles joins us for a nice catch up.
High school cheerleaders in South San Francisco got more than eyeful earlier this month when a naked man wandered into their locker room, made eye contact, waved his penis at them and then left, which Leigh thinks looks like Brian. McDonald's announced that it plans to start transitioning to sustainable beef by 2016, with the goal of eventually making all of its burgers from sustainable meat. Authorities have charged a northern New York woman and her boyfriend because the woman's 2-year-old daughter used their cellphones to dial 911 a total of 15 times last month. Michael, 11, loves My Little Pony. This passion reportedly sparked relentless bullying from his classmates in Raleigh, N.C., and eventually led the boy to attempt suicide.
The video version of the DB Show is only available [along with other EPIC benefits] to those awesome peeps who are TV Licence holders. The Dirty Boxers TV Licence ensures we can keep the lights on, brew the coffee and keep the servers humming. Please consider getting a TV Licence today and keep Dirty Boxers on the air!
[membership level="1″"2″"3″"4″"5″"6″"7″"8″][/membership]


text:
Welcome to ShemaleStrokers.com
The most popular TS models from BOB
Cute asian well hung shemales. Check out AsianShemalesXXX
Google | Yahoo | ShemalePrivate | PornStar DB | BigBoobs Private | ShemaleFan
All images on this website are licensed and comply with 18 USC 2257. All links on this site lead to pages provided by 3rd parties. We have no control over the content of these pages, but all models are believed to be at least 18 years of age. PrettyTranny.NET is not responsible in any way for the content of the urls, sites and pages that can be accessed by following the provided links.
Design by © 2005-2009 ShemalePrivate.com .Reproduction in any form is strictly forbidden.


text:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.OK, here's what you need to know:
1. "Well regulated" is 18th Century English for "disciplined" or "drilled." The term does NOT refer to the State (either state or State) controlling the militia, it refers to the level of training necessary for a militia to function.
From Federalist #29 (Hamilton): "The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss."See also various passages from the journals of the Continental Congress and excerpts from the letters of George Washington.
Among military historians of the 18th and 19th Century this is not in the slightest a controversial understanding--it is common usage.
2. "Necessary for the security of a free State" has to be interpreted in the historical context of the times. The Framers were clearly worried about the threat to liberty posed by "a standing army," and believed for a brief period (from about 1785-1796) that it was practical to place the foremost reliance for the defense of the country in the hands of state-organized and common militias.
Again, from Federalist #29 (Hamilton): "Of the different grounds which have been taken in opposition to the plan of the convention, there is none that was so little to have been expected, or is so untenable in itself, as the one from which this particular provision has been attacked. If a well-regulated militia be the most natural defense of a free country, it ought certainly to be under the regulation and at the disposal of that body which is constituted the guardian of the national security. If standing armies are dangerous to liberty, an efficacious power over the militia, in the body to whose care the protection of the State is committed, ought, as far as possible, to take away the inducement and the pretext to such unfriendly institutions. If the federal government can command the aid of the militia in those emergencies which call for the military arm in support of the civil magistrate, it can the better dispense with the employment of a different kind of force. If it cannot avail itself of the former, it will be obliged to recur to the latter. To render an army unnecessary, will be a more certain method of preventing its existence than a thousand prohibitions upon paper."Apologizing for the length of the quotation, there are two significant items here.
First, the argument is that only the existence of a "well-regulated militia" can prevent the Federal government from having to organize "a standing army" to defend the country. I say this again: the purpose of having a "well regulated militia" was "to render an army unnecessary."
Second, Hamilton argues (as did all the Federalists) that in order for the militia to perform in lieu of a standing army, its training had to be controlled by the Federal government. That is implied in the passage quoted above, and made explicitly clear elsewhere in Federalist #29:
"THE power of regulating the militia, and of commanding its services in times of insurrection and invasion are natural incidents to the duties of superintending the common defense, and of watching over the internal peace of the Confederacy.
It requires no skill in the science of war to discern that uniformity in the organization and discipline of the militia would be attended with the most beneficial effects, whenever they were called into service for the public defense. It would enable them to discharge the duties of the camp and of the field with mutual intelligence and concert an advantage of peculiar moment in the operations of an army; and it would fit them much sooner to acquire the degree of proficiency in military functions which would be essential to their usefulness. This desirable uniformity can only be accomplished by confiding the regulation of the militia to the direction of the national authority. It is, therefore, with the most evident propriety, that the plan of the convention proposes to empower the Union "to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, RESERVING TO THE STATES RESPECTIVELY THE APPOINTMENT OF THE OFFICERS, AND THE AUTHORITY OF TRAINING THE MILITIA ACCORDING TO THE DISCIPLINE PRESCRIBED BY CONGRESS."The check on standing armies, as Hamilton and the rest of the Framers saw it, would be in the States' power to name the officers of those militias and to conduct the routine training of those militias "according to the discipline prescribed by Congress." If you need further evidence, try checking the contemporary state constitutions. Maryland's 1777 constitution actually takes the time to lay out this argument in some detail:
XXV. That a well-regulated militia is the proper and natural defence of a free government.
XXVI. That standing armies are dangerous to liberty, and ought not to be raised or kept up, without consent of the Legislature.
XXVII. That in all cases, and at all times, the military ought to be under strict subordination to and control of the civil power.
XXVIII. That no soldier ought to be quartered in any house, in time of peace, without the consent of the owner; and in time of war, in such manner only, as the Legislature shall direct,
XXIX. That no person, except regular soldiers, mariners, and marines in the service of this State, or militia when in actual service, ought in any case to be subject to or punishable by martial law.
What the Framers were attempting to do was execute an ultimately unsuccessful attempt to Federalize (in the sense of shared authority between National and State governments) the defense of the United States in such fashion as it would not lead to despotic control of a standing army by the National government. As we shall see below, this experiment proved to be a dismal failure.
3. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms" was a fundamental right, and was intended for not only the defense of the country and personal defense, but also as a check on government tyranny, but (and here is the critical point) that right was vested in the State constitutions, not the US Constitution.
Let's take a detour through a few of the Revolutionary and Constitutional period state constitutions:
XIII. That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; And that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
XVIII. That the people have a right to bear arms, for the defence of themselves and the State: and as standing armies, in the time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by the civil power.
Some State constitutions put a more limited construction on this right:
Art. XVII. The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature; and the military power shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority and be governed by it.
((An aside: just in case you were wondering, even when States later rewrote their Constitutions, they usually preserved the right to bear arms for personal defense:))XVII. That the people have a right to bear arms, for the defence of the State; and, as standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
Delaware Constitution (1897)
§ 20. Right to keep and bear arms.
Section 20. A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and State, and for hunting and recreational use.
Many other State constitutions did not, however, mention the right of bearing arms "for the defense of themselves" at all. The conclusion through viewing the contemporary state constitutions is pretty clear to most historians: the fundamental right to bear arms was guaranteed or circumscribed by the State, not the Federal government. That statement in the 2nd Amendment--"the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed"--was a statement intended to mean that the Federal government could not modify or reduce that right--only the States could do so. It was not, when it was written, a direct guarantee of individual rights to bear arms because that was considered the province of the States.
However, both the 14th Amendment and several Supreme Court decisions in the 1930s changed that. The 14th Amendment functionally moves the primary responsibility for the protection of individual and civil liberties from the States to the Federal government, and in the 1930s the courts decided once and for all that the Bill of Rights overrode State constitutions to provide direct protections to citizens from ALL levels of government.
Here's where it gets a little tricky. After the 1930s, the Bill of Rights was established as the basic level of protection enjoyed by all citizens of the US against all levels of government. But while the States cannot reduce the guarantees in the Bill of Rights, they can increase them. Thus the enhanced privacy provisions of the Alaska State Constitution have been long been used to prevent police from arresting people for using small amounts of marijuana on the their private property. And--going back to the current Delaware constitution cited above--while there may be no explicit right to bear arms for personal defense in the US Constitution, there certainly is one in Delaware. (And in most other states as well.)
Unlike the 1st Amendment, the 2nd Amendment language (which was originally intended as a check on Federal power against the States) did not translate as well when it became a guarantee of individual rights. It looks muddled, because it is now being used an interpreted as something different than the original intent, thanks to the 14th Amendment and the Supreme Court.
(This is a legal process of changing meanings that goes on all the time. The provision in the original US Constitution that forbid the Feds from stopping the importation of slaves prior to 1808 was actually twisted around by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions to refer to general immigration law, not the importation of slaves. During the 1880s, Associate Supreme Court Justice Stephen Feilds wrote a series of decisions on the 14th Amendment that converted it from a civil rights amendment to a grant of full, Constitutionally protected personhood for corporations. So it goes.)
So, ironically, when the Constitution was written, it was not intended to be the primary guarantor of a citizen's right to bear arms for personal defense (that role was left to the States) and it only became that primary guarantor much later and almost by accident.
4. The reliance on militias as a functional alternative to a standing army was a failed experiment, and was effectively dropped (in the sense that Hamilton argues for it in Federalist #29) by the time we reached the American Civil War.
It has become almost heretical these days to point out that large sections of the original US Constitution simply did not work as intended. The idea that the candidate receiving the second highest vote total for President should become Vice-President was quickly revealed to be a BAAAAD idea, and changed within less than two decades. The section of the original Constitution on the Supreme Court and the Federal court system was so hopelessly botched that our Federal courts actually run off the Judiciary Act of 1789 rather than the US Constitution, and the whole premise of judicial review (declaring laws unconstitutional) is nowhere in either of those documents. Chief Justice John Marshall simply made it up and made it stick.
Militias proved very quickly to be an inadequate reliance for national defense, first in the Whiskey Rebellion, then again in the War of 1812. The Nat Turner uprising in Virginia in 1831 turned most Southern militias from organizations committed to defense from external attack into organizations dedicated to suppressing slave revolts. The attempt by both Virginia and Tennessee to use their militias as the building blocks for their armies during the first months of the Civil War turned out to be abysmal failures. A few units, like some New York artillery militia units, would function well in that war, but their heritage was as private militia companies, not State militias, and they were the exceptions to the rule. After the Civil War, most National Guard units got their start as being the strong-arm forces that State governors used as strike-breaking forces against labor unions. In the Philippine War, World War 1 and World War 2 it was publicly acknowledged and planned for that National Guard units had to be almost completely retrained by the active-duty army before they were competent to deploy. (That truth has remained for combat arms units in the modern National Guard heading for Desert Storm and later conflicts until those units had each individually acquired tactical expertise and a cadre of veterans.)
Instead of relying on militias as a counterpoint to a standing army, during the first half of the 19th Century the United States substituted a much stronger subordination of military to civil power than is found in most nations, and adopted the cultural value that active-duty officers should not be involved in politics. Moreover, our soldiers swear their oaths to the Constitution rather than to the government; it is an essential difference.
OK if you have read this far you deserve some sort of conclusion, and here it is:
There is a right to keep and bear arms for personal defense, but that right derives originally from the States, not the Federal government. The Feds were only originally enjoined not to mess with rights that the State granted.
The whole "militia vs standing army" argument was resolved, for all practical purposes, by 1865 at the latest, with the close subordination of the military to civilian authority and the culture of apolitical officers.
The 14th Amendment and the Supreme Court unfortunately muddied the waters when reinterpreting the Bill of Rights as basic protections enjoyed by all citizens against ALL levels of government.
And knowing this will satisfy ... nobody.


text:
The Tech's Athlete of the Week: Portia Jones '12
The Tech's Athlete of the Week: Portia Jones '12
After a record-setting performance at the Springfield Invitational over the weekend, Portia M. Jones '12 has been named the New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference (NEWMAC) Track Athlete of the Week for the second consecutive week. The freshman was a part of one winning relay squad and helped set three school records on Saturday, as the Engineers took first place in the meet, their final tune-up before this weekend's NEWMAC Championship. In addition, Jones was named the Eastern College Athletic Conference (ECAC) Track Athlete of the Week for the first time this year.
Jones anchored the victorious 4x400m relay team that achieved an NCAA provisional qualification with its time of 3:56.16. That time is now the fastest in school history. She also reached the provisional mark in the 400m and set a new MIT record, finishing second in 56.95 seconds. Jones also set an Institute record in the 200 with a time of 25.32, good for third place overall.
This is the fifth Conference Athlete of the Week selection for the Engineers this season.
Tech will travel to Mount Holyoke College for the NEWMAC Championship on Saturday, April 25. The meet begins at 11:00 a.m.
—Greg McKeever, DAPER Staff


text:
Your Paint Your Pet Template Pack includes your Pet's Silhouette profile, trendy leaf and rose. We also include a FREE Teaching video on how to paint your pet with different patterns including leaves, roses and buffalo check.
Size of canvas is for reference only. The canvas size shown is 11 x 14. Templates are formatted to fit on a 11x14 canvas. *Canvas not included.
What is included:
- Your Pet Silhouette Profile as shown in the first picture. (other images are shown for inspiration only)
- Rose Template
- Leaf Template
- Online Painting tutorial to match painting at www.youtube.com/tipsyartist
- All templates are environmentally friendly with no plastic *superior quality heavy cardstock for long lasting use (we have been using these materials in our large shows for more than 10 years with excellent performance with this material)
Rat Terrier Template Pack
$14.97 Regular Price
$9.97Sale Price
All Online Orders are shipped with Insurance. Please file a claim with your USPS carrier. Tracking Information will always be provided. Online sales and final. Thank you again for your order!


text:
Thor: Ragnarok.
A much better movie than I expected.
I loved the main theme of exile, the path the brothers followed, and they were approaching each other when the forces of chaos seemed invincible.
A much more mature movie than Marvel's previous productions, does not include exalted conclussion (like Watchmen).
The film developed Thor's story, and finally a good movie was made about him.
However, it does not develop much the rest of the universe, there is not much about orbs of infinity.


text:
Glenn Close, whose financial support helped to restore the White House Solar Panels used at Unity College, will receive the Mid-Life Achievement Award at MIFF.
One of the premier environmental colleges in the United States remembers its humble origins in 1965. It also credits individuals who played significant roles in its history—including six time Academy Award nominee Glenn Close—for helping it through difficult challenges.
Officials at Unity were elated to learn that, on July 13, at an event slated for the Waterville Opera House, Close will receive the Mid-Life Achievement Award. Members of the college community were reminded of the special place in the storied history of Unity College that the actress holds. It is a place that few beyond the College community know.
In the early 1990s, Close donated funds that allowed Unity College to refurbish the array of solar panels formerly atop the White House during the administration of Jimmy Carter. The panels were taken down during the administration of President Ronald Reagan and placed in government storage, where they remained until the early 1990s.
With the help of former Maine Senator William Cohen, the panels were then released from government storage and transported to Unity College, where they were refurbished with funds from Close and several other benefactors. These panels supplemented the hot water system for the cafeteria.
The saga of the White House solar panels moving to Unity College continues to take on a life of its own, with President Barack Obama re-installing solar atop the White House in 2014.
For over a decade, the panels formerly atop the White House warmed water in the cafeteria at Unity College until they reached the end of their useful lifespan. In 2004, the College considered what to do with the panels. An Associated Press story about the panels brought Swiss filmmakers Christina Hemauer and Roman Keller to campus for the exploration of a possible documentary film topic.
Over the next four years, they made multiple trips to the United States to film the documentary entitled A Road Not Taken, about Carter's vision for the panels, their fate, resurrection, and future.
The documentary featured Unity College alumni Sara Trunzo '08 and Jason Reynolds '05, who brought one of the White House panels on a road trip from Unity, Maine, to the Carter Center in Atlanta, Georgia. They were searching for the meaning of America's turn from the opportunity to pursue renewable energy that President Carter had championed. A clip featuring Reynolds is available on the Unity College sustainability website.
A rough cut of The Road Not Taken was screened during at the 2009 Maine International Film Festival and both filmmakers attended the premier. The documentary showcasing the Unity solar panel story has since been screened at film festivals internationally.
The documentary was re-cut in 2010 to include a new interview with former President Jimmy Carter, who shared his candid feelings about why the panels were removed from the White House.
Also in 2010, Huang Ming, Chairman of Himin Solar, one of the largest solar manufacturing companies in the world, visited Unity College to accept the gift of a White House solar panel to the people of China. After accepting the gift in a ceremony held at the Unity College Center for the Performing Arts, Ming travelled to the Carter Center in Georgia, where he met with former President Jimmy Carter.
The panel that was gifted to Ming is on permanent display at Dezhou Solar City museum in China. Unity gifted panels from the White House array of 32 panels to the Smithsonian and Carter Center. One panel is on permanent display on campus, while the balance is in storage.
"The saga of the former White House solar panels is ongoing," noted Michael Evans, Ph.D., Vice President for Academic Affairs. "They have inspired a generation of students to imagine the possibilities for achieving a more sustainable planet. We all applaud Ms. Close for her generosity to help the solar panels formerly atop the White House to find a new, useful existence after years of government storage."
Although their peak energy producing life is over and primary value being historical, Evans noted that the College regularly fields requests for the panels to either be loaned or gifted. Unity College will be fundraising over the next year to purchase new solar panels set for installation at various locations on campus.